Bring back the ‘New Deal’?
It is unlikely to happen….
But it will catch people’s attention in places empolyemnet is needed….
Democrats hope for those votes from those Trump promised help , but failed to produce it….
Prominent Democrats — stung by their eroding support from working-class voters but buoyed by the deficit-be-damned approach of ruling Republicans — are embracing a big idea from a bygone era: guaranteed employment.
The “job guarantee” plans, many of them pressed by Democratic White House hopefuls, vary in scope and cost, but they all center on government-sponsored employment that pays well above the $7.25-an-hour federal minimum wage — a New Deal for a new age, absent the bread lines and unemployment rates of the Great Depression. The most aggressive plans seek to all but eradicate unemployment and to set a new wage floor for all working Americans, pressuring private employers to raise wages if they want to compete for workers.
How such guarantees would be paid for is still largely unresolved. And criticism of the idea has emerged not only from conservatives who detect a whiff of socialism but also from liberals who say guaranteed employment is the wrong way to attack the central issue facing workers in this low-unemployment economy: stagnant wages.
But Democratic leaders hope the push will help their party bridge the growing political divide between white and minority workers, and silence the naysayers who accuse the party of being devoid of new, big ideas….
Note…
This is straight out of the Bernie Sanders playbook by the way….
And Sanders never could explain how he would pay for such a thing…
image…vox
I don’t support this – not so much because of the increase taxes (by the way, the Democrats can borrow the money just like Republicans did if necessary), but because it would crowd out private sector capital investments. For example, why would any employer decide to substantially increase jobs when they would have a hard time finding employees to fill those jobs?
Again?
I did NOT support this from Sanders due to cost and paying for it….
I have not changed my mind….
Don’t worry – we all know you wouldn’t support anything that Sanders supports. Just because you don’t remember the 500 times you said the same thing – sometimes using the same words – doesn’t mean The rest of us don’t either.
I DID say that some of Sanders Idea’s where good….
Sanders and Hillary largely agreed on about 80% of all issues – maybe even more than that, and so it would follow that your posts on Sanders would show that you almost always agreed with him.
For the most part, your only negative posts on Hillary had to do with her being a poor campaigner. You argued passionately and continuously that Democrats shouldn’t bring up gun control, yet you were silent when Hillary appropriately criticized Sanders for not being sufficiently opposed to it.
What are some of Sanders good ideas?
Bernie was good on equal pay for mine and women, the middle class getting screwed, support of social security, but MOST of all Z?….Increase taxes for the rich!
My main problem with Sanders idea’s is the ability to pay for grandiose ideas like full employment, free college, etc…..
Oh, and he isn’t a Democrat, but he ‘s trying to co-op the party like Trump did to the GOPer’s…But at least Trump joined the party….
Sanders spends a hell of a lot more time talking about increased taxes for the rich than free college. Wasn’t free college approved in New York? I don’t recall you complaining about it on a state level – only when Sanders proposed it.
Cuomo’s ‘free’ college comes with all kinds of strings Z….
It is nothing like what Sanders wants, which would be broad based and expensive and again?….He doesn’t explain how he would pay for it other than taxing the rich, which we KNOW has NO real chance of coming into being…
In the highly unlikely event that a tuition free bill were to pass in the next decade, I am fairly certain that it would have even more strings attached than what exists in NY.
And additional taxation on the wealthy WILL eventually pass – although the Dems will need the House, Senate and Presidency for that to happen.
This proposal – which I disagree with – actually has very strong countrywide support. Sanders says it would be paid by the wealthy, but in fairness, it would also substantially reduce the cost of Unemployment, Medicaid and welfare benefits.
On the plus side, isn’t there some advantage to paying people to work instead of government paying them to do nothing?